- Код статьи
- S086904990000384-4-
- DOI
- 10.31857/S086904990000384-4
- Тип публикации
- Статья
- Статус публикации
- Опубликовано
- Авторы
- Том/ Выпуск
- Том / Номер 5
- Страницы
- 73-86
- Аннотация
В статье рассматривается конструирование сетевых связей В. Путина и А. Навального с различными вопросами российской общественной дискуссии в федеральной прессе, в рамках теории владения повесткой дня. У политических акторов есть круг вопросов, наиболее очевидно ассоциирующихся с ними. "Владение" политиком темами, которые воспринимаются в обществе как важные, определяет его популярность среди населения. Проведенный анализ показывает, что у Путина больше возможностей для формирования повестки дня, поскольку он чаще упоминается в связи с вопросами экономики и международных отношений. Эти темы привлекают внимание населения, и его деятельность в этих сферах воспринимается как успешная. Имя Навального соотносится с вопросами коррупции, НКО и гражданского активизма. Что касается коррупции, то этому явлению уделяется меньше внимания в федеральных СМИ, что не позволяет Навальному получить максимальную выгоду от владения этой темой.
- Ключевые слова
- СМИ, сетевая повестка дня, владение повесткой, имидж политиков, электоральное поведение, общественное мнение, Путин, Навальный, выборы 2018
- Дата публикации
- 14.10.2018
- Год выхода
- 2018
- Всего подписок
- 10
- Всего просмотров
- 1943
Библиография
- 1. Казун А.Д. (2018) “Осветить нельзя игнорировать”: Алексей Навальный в российских СМИ // Полития. № 1. С. 47–64.
- 2. Казун А.Д. (2017) Откуда берется повестка дня? Роль СМИ в конструировании значимости событий // Вестник общественного мнения. Данные. Анализ. Дискуссии. Т. 124. № 1–2. С. 182–189.
- 3. Парсонс Т. (1993) Понятие общества: компоненты и их взаимоотношения // THESIS. № 2. С. 94–122.
- 4. Трегубов Н.А. (2017) Факторы голосования: вопросы классификации и анализа // Полис. Политические исследования. № 3. С. 119–134.
- 5. Хилгартнер С., Боск Ч.Л. (2008) Рост и упадок социальных проблем: концепция публичных арен // Социальная реальность. № 2. С. 73–94.
- 6. Яковлев А.А., Левина И.А., Казун А.Д. (2015) Для каких фирм улучшился деловой климат в 2012–2014 гг.? // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. № 3. С. 35–60.
- 7. Ясавеев И.Г. (2006) Конструирование “не-проблем”: стратегии депроблематизации ситуаций // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. № 1. С. 91–102.
- 8. Ansolabehere S., Iyengar S. (1994) Riding the wave and claiming ownership over issues: The joint effects of advertising and news coverage in campaigns // Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 58. No. 3. Pp. 335–357.
- 9. Balmas M., Sheafer T. (2013) Leaders First, Countries After: Mediated Political Personalization in the International Arena // Journal of Communication. Vol. 63. No. 3. Pp. 454–475.
- 10. Bélanger É. (2003) Issue Ownership by Canadian Political Parties 1953-2001 // Canadian Journal of Political Science. Vol. 36. No. 3. Pp. 539–558.
- 11. Bennett W. L. (1990) Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations in the United States // Journal of Communication. Vol. 40. No. 2. Pp. 103 – 125.
- 12. Boomgaarden H. G., Vliegenthart R. (2007) Explaining the rise of anti-immigrant parties: The role of news media content // Electoral Studies. Vol. 26. No. 2. Pp. 404–417.
- 13. Brasher H. (2009) The Dynamic Character of Political Party Evaluations // Party Politics. Vol. 15. No. 1. Pp. 69–92.
- 14. Brody R. (1991) Assessing the President: The Media, Elite Opinion, and Public Support. Stanford, California: Stanford Univ. Press.
- 15. Budge I., Farlie D. J. (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London; Boston: Unwin Hyman.
- 16. Burscher B., van Spanje J., de Vreese C. H. (2015) Owning the issues of crime and immigration: The relation between immigration and crime news and anti-immigrant voting in 11 countries // Electoral Studies. Vol. 38. Pp. 59– 69.
- 17. Cheng Y. (2016) The third-level agenda-setting study: an examination of media, implicit, and explicit public agendas in China // Asian Journal of Communication. Vol. 26. No. 4. Pp. 319–332.
- 18. Cheng Y., Chan C.-M. (2015) The Third Level of Agenda Setting in Contemporary China: Tracking Descriptions of Moral and National Education (MNE) in Media Coverage and People’s Minds // International Journal of Communication. Vol. 9. Pp. 1090–1107.
- 19. Colton T. J. (2017) Paradoxes of Putinism // Daedalus. Vol. 146. No. 2. Pр. 8–18.
- 20. De Bruycker I., Walgrave S. (2014) How a New Issue Becomes an Owned Issue. Media Coverage and the Financial Crisis in Belgium (2008–2009) // International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Vol. 26. No. 1. Pp. 86–97.
- 21. Elinder M., Jordahl H., Poutvaara P. (2015) Promises, policies and pocketbook voting // European Economic Review. Vol. 75. Pp. 177–194.
- 22. Frye T., Gehlbach S., Marquardt K.L., Reuter O.J. (2017) Is Putin’s popularity real? // Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 33. No. 1. Pp. 1–15.
- 23. Gehlbach S. (2010) Reflections on Putin and the Media // Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 26. No. 1. Pp. 77–87.
- 24. Goggin S.N., Theodoridis A.G. (2017) Disputed Ownership: Parties, Issues, and Traits in the Minds of Voters // Political Behavior. Vol. 39. No. 3. Pp. 675–702.
- 25. Goidel R.K., Shields T.G. (1994) The Vanishing Marginals, the Bandwagon, and the Mass Media // The Journal of Politics. Vol. 56. No. 3. Pp. 802–810.
- 26. Graber D. (2004) Mediated Politics and Citizenship in the Twenty-First Century // Annual Review of Psychology. Vol. 55. No. 1. Pp. 545– 571.
- 27. Green J., Jennings W. (2012) The dynamics of issue competence and vote for parties in and out of power: An analysis of valence in Britain, 1979–1997 // European Journal of Political Research. Vol. 51. No. 4. Pp. 469–503.
- 28. Guo L., Chen Y.-N., Vu H., Wang Q., Aksamit R., Guzek D., McCombs M. (2015) Coverage of the Iraq War in the United States, Mainland China, Taiwan and Poland // Journalism Studies. Vol. 16. No. 3. Pp. 343–362.
- 29. Guo L., Vargo C. (2015) The Power of Message Networks: A Big-Data Analysis of the Network Agenda Setting Model and Issue Ownership // Mass Communication and Society. Vol. 18. No. 5. Pp. 557–576.
- 30. Hansford T., Gomez B. (2015) Reevaluating the sociotropic economic voting hypothesis // Electoral Studies. Vol. 39. Pp. 15–25.
- 31. Harvey C.J. (2016) Changes in the menu of manipulation: Electoral fraud, ballot stuffing, and voter pressure in the 2011 Russian election // Electoral Studies. Vol. 41. Pp. 105–117.
- 32. Holian D.B. (2004) He’s Stealing My Issues! Clinton’s Crime Rhetoric and the Dynamics of Issue Ownership // Political Behavior. Vol. 26. No. 2. Pp. 95–124.
- 33. Ju Y. (2014) Issue obtrusiveness and negative bias: exploring the moderating factors for asymmetric news coverage of the economy // Asian Journal of Communication. Vol. 24. No. 5. Pp. 441–455.
- 34. Kiousis S., Kim J.Y., Ragas M., Wheat G., Kochhar S., Svensson E., Miles M. (2015) Exploring New Frontiers of Agenda Building During the 2012 US Presidential Election Pre-Convention Period // Journalism Studies. Vol. 16. No. 3. Pp. 363–382.
- 35. Kraft J. (2017) Social democratic austerity: the conditional role of agenda dynamics and issue ownership // Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 24. No. 10. Pp. 1430–1449.
- 36. Lachat R. (2014) Issue Ownership and the Vote: The Effects of Associative and Competence Ownership on Issue Voting // Swiss Political Science Review. Vol. 20. No. 4. Pp. 727–740.
- 37. LeDuc L., Niemi R.G., Norris P. (eds.) (2010) Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in the 21st Century (3 edition). Los Angeles, Calif.: SAGE Publications Ltd.
- 38. Lefevere J., Walgrave S., Stubager R., Tresch A. (2017) Measuring Issue Ownership: A Comparative Question Wording Experiment // Scandinavian Political Studies. Vol. 40. No. 1. Pp. 120–131.
- 39. Mazzoleni G., Schulz W. (1999) “Mediatization” of Politics: A Challenge for Democracy? // Political Communication. Vol. 16. No. 3. Pp. 247–261.
- 40. McCombs M. (1977) Agenda setting function of mass media // Public Relations Review. Vol. 3. No. 4. Pp. 89–95.
- 41. McCombs M. (2014) Setting the Agenda: Mass Media and Public Opinion. John Wiley & Sons.
- 42. McCombs M., Graber D., Weaver D. (1981) Media Agenda-Setting in the Presidential Election. New York: Praeger Scientific.
- 43. McCombs M., Shaw D., Weaver D. (2014) New Directions in Agenda-Setting Theory and Research // Mass Communication and Society. Vol. 17. No. 6. Pp. 781–802.
- 44. Neuman R.W., Guggenheim L., Jang M.S., Bae S.Y. (2014) The Dynamics of Public Attention: Agenda-Setting Theory Meets Big Data: Dynamics of Public Attention // Journal of Communication. Vol. 64. No. 2. Pp. 193–214.
- 45. Norris P. (2004) Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. Cambridge Univ. Press.
- 46. Petrocik J. R. (1996) Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study // American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 40. No. 3. Pp. 825–850.
- 47. Riker W. H. (1993) Agenda Formation. Univ. of Michigan Press.
- 48. Rogers J. (2014) A communotropic theory of economic voting // Electoral Studies. Vol. 36. Pp. 107–116.
- 49. Rose R., Munro N. (2002) Elections without Order: Russia’s Challenge to Vladimir Putin. Cambridge Univ. Press.
- 50. Seeberg H.B. (2017) How Stable Is Political Parties’ Issue Ownership? A Cross-Time, Cross-National Analysis // Political Studies. Vol. 65. No. 2. Pp. 475–492.
- 51. Stubager R. (2017) What is Issue Ownership and How Should We Measure It? // Political Behavior. Pp. 1–26.
- 52. Thesen G., Green-Pedersen C., Mortensen P. B. (2017) Priming, Issue Ownership, and Party Support: The Electoral Gains of an Issue-Friendly Media Agenda // Political Communication. Vol. 34. No. 2. Pp. 282–301.
- 53. Treisman D. (2011) Presidential Popularity in a Hybrid Regime: Russia under Yeltsin and Putin // American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 55. No. 3. Pp. 590–609.
- 54. Treisman D. (2014) Putin’s Popularity since 2010: Why Did Support for the Kremlin Plunge, Then Stabilize? // Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 30. No. 5. Pp. 370–388.
- 55. Tresch A., Lefevere J., Walgrave S. (2015) ‘Steal me if you can!’ The impact of campaign messages on associative issue ownership // Party Politics. Vol. 21. No. 2. Pp. 198–208.
- 56. Van Aelst P., Sheafer T., Stanyer J. (2012) The personalization of mediated political communication: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings // Journalism. Vol. 13. No. 2. Pp. 203–220.
- 57. Vartanova E. (2012) The Russian Media Model in the Context of Post-Soviet Dynamics // Hallin D.C., Mancini P., eds. Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World. Pp. 119–142.
- 58. Vu H. T., Guo L., McCombs M. E. (2014) Exploring “the World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads”: A Network Agenda-Setting Study // Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. Vol. 91. No. 4. Pp. 669–686.
- 59. Walgrave S., De Swert K. (2007) Where Does Issue Ownership Come From? From the Party or from the Media? Issue-party Identifications in Belgium, 1991-2005 // International Journal of Press/Politics. Vol. 12. No. 1. Pp. 37–67.
- 60. Walgrave S., Lefevere J., Tresch A. (2012) The Associative Dimension of Issue Ownership // Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 76. No. 4. Pp. 771–782.
- 61. Walgrave S., Tresch A., Lefevere J. (2015) The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Issue Ownership // West European Politics. Vol. 38. No. 4. Pp. 778–796.